Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Boeing, and FAA oversight

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Boeing, and FAA oversight

Old 13th Jan 2020, 00:54
  #101 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Indonesia
Age: 56
Posts: 18
As this thread is about FAA oversight, based on the in-house communication of Boeing employees, the language used indicates great frustration at the working level about decision made of higher management level, and the hope that the FAA would put an end to it, which it did not. The major missteps already identified, which FAA was not fully informed of - or has inexplicably allowed, in simple language are:
1. MCAS was decided as not necessary to be known to pilots.
2. The expansion of power of MCAS after the initial design of a more "benign" form
3. One sensor suffices for MCAS purposes
4. No simulator time needed.
The employees having those conversations should be immediately protected from their (former?) employer and given whistleblower status to be able to identify who their higher ups were for those fatal decision....
Dungdang is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2020, 01:46
  #102 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Lost, but often Indonesia
Posts: 598
Originally Posted by OldnGrounded View Post
Apologies if this has already been cited (I looked but didn't find it in the thread.) From the Seattle Times story:



I find this rather mind-boggling. Not content to assure customers who didn't want training requirements, Boeing apparently felt it necessary to discourage those who did.
Mr Forkner is the self confessed "Jedi mind tricks" specialist...
Octane is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2020, 02:35
  #103 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 3,047
May be of interest. Boeing Fought Lion Air On Proposed MAX Simulator Training Requirement

https://aviationweek.com/air-transpo...81045857feedc9
megan is online now  
Old 13th Jan 2020, 06:53
  #104 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,755
They talk a lot about the LGW Max simulator. I had about an hour in that as part of a company sim ride late 2017. I remember it requiring enormous inputs to bring the nose back down/up following climbs and descents. The trim switches also did nothing initially and then 5 seconds later would put in an almighty input. Quite a hairy experience.
Superpilot is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2020, 07:07
  #105 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Tent
Posts: 476
Originally Posted by Superpilot View Post
They talk a lot about the LGW Max simulator. I had about an hour in that as part of a company sim ride late 2017. I remember it requiring enormous inputs to bring the nose back down/up following climbs and descents. The trim switches also did nothing initially and then 5 seconds later would put in an almighty input. Quite a hairy experience.
Any chance this "hairy experience" was reported?

Or were you made to look stupid or inexperienced?

Genuine question due the email releases.
Bend alot is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2020, 07:25
  #106 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: EDSP
Posts: 216
Just to make sure ... we are talking about this facility?

You did fly the actual real thing? Did it behave the same way?
Or was it part of a pre sales evaluation?
BDAttitude is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2020, 11:51
  #107 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,755
Yes, Boeing Training Centre in Crawley (formerly Alteon). My group of candidates were the first people asked to use it for the assessment and it was new at the time, or newly worked on. The assessor did ask at the end 'how was it?' I said 'difficult'. He then made a remark about the sim with his colleague, can't remember but it wasn't positive. I passed the assessment anyway.
Superpilot is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2020, 13:44
  #108 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Spain and Gibraltar
Posts: 55
Well one of the Boeing people mentioned in this thread seem to have done OK for themselves:-

Former Boeing chief Dennis Muilenburg leaves with $62m

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-51089287
Nil by mouth is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2020, 13:47
  #109 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Under the radar, over the rainbow
Posts: 701
Originally Posted by Superpilot View Post
They talk a lot about the LGW Max simulator. I had about an hour in that as part of a company sim ride late 2017. I remember it requiring enormous inputs to bring the nose back down/up following climbs and descents. The trim switches also did nothing initially and then 5 seconds later would put in an almighty input. Quite a hairy experience.
Sure sounds hairy. I wonder how many other pilots out there had similar experiences in a MAX sim and are wondering how to interpret them in light of what we now know.
OldnGrounded is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2020, 15:40
  #110 (permalink)  

 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bourton-on-the-Water
Posts: 879
The man who has just replaced the fired Boeing CEO, Dennis Muilenburg, has sent his employees an interesting email, which the company has chosen to publish.

In it, Dave (as he signs himself) Calhoun, talks about "return[ing] the 737 MAX to service safely", "rebuild[ing] trust", and "maintain[ing] production health", among other things. He ends with "My sleeves are rolled up. I know yours are, too."

https://www.boeing.com/features/2020...employees.page

airsound
airsound is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2020, 16:09
  #111 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,344
Originally Posted by BDAttitude View Post
Just to make sure ... we are talking about this facility?

You did fly the actual real thing? Did it behave the same way?
Or was it part of a pre sales evaluation?
This is the critical issue - many of these comments are about the simulator behavior and not about the actual aircraft. It is really important that simulator errors and faults are not ascribed to the real aircraft. I haven't seen any thread that says that the original MCAS and failure of one AoA vane was something that could even be simulated. So 'technical pilots' talking about assessing simulator behavior cannot have been talking about the MCAS failure problems, and probably not even about MCAS operating correctly.
Ian W is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2020, 16:31
  #112 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: leftcoast
Posts: 3
In it, Dave (as he signs himself) Calhoun, talks about "return[ing] the 737 MAX to service safely", "rebuild[ing] trust", and "maintain[ing] production health", among other things. He ends with "My sleeves are rolled up. I know yours are, too."
MBA speak for Sign here- schedule your ethics refresher within the next two weeks, and the beatings will continue until morale improves.

To show our respect for dennis m- we suggest employees contribute sufficient funds to assure he can get a extra large tent to pitch on peoples park for his retirement.
Grebe is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2020, 16:47
  #113 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: EDSP
Posts: 216
Originally Posted by Ian W View Post
This is the critical issue - many of these comments are about the simulator behavior and not about the actual aircraft. It is really important that simulator errors and faults are not ascribed to the real aircraft. I haven't seen any thread that says that the original MCAS and failure of one AoA vane was something that could even be simulated. So 'technical pilots' talking about assessing simulator behavior cannot have been talking about the MCAS failure problems, and probably not even about MCAS operating correctly.
I've pointed out that Forkner could have experienced (most likely has IMHO) a real MCAS event here ​​​​:
MAX’s Return Delayed by FAA Reevaluation of 737 Safety Procedures
I think we have to differentiate
a) Engineering sims which hopefully have represented the aircraft well enough to fulfill their purpose in expedited development and certification (not sure).
b) Commercial full motion sims, that seem to have issues and program delays themselves which might just be another reason why mandated sim training was a no go for BA.
​​​​
BDAttitude is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2020, 17:19
  #114 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: 900m
Posts: 92
If you speak with forked tongue...

The quotes from and to TP Forkner put him and Boeing in quite a pickle, which while it has nothing to do with pickle forks as such, does amount to a fork-ing problem...
Twitter is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2020, 17:54
  #115 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: USVI
Posts: 68
a) Engineering sims which hopefully have represented the aircraft well enough to fulfill their purpose in expedited development and certification (not sure).
b) Commercial full motion sims, that seem to have issues and program delays themselves which might just be another reason why mandated sim training was a no go for BA.
Was it because of the SW mandate and/or the simple lack of MAX sims?

I mean there are enough differences on the flightdeck where you really cannot use an NG sim.
​​​​
turbidus is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2020, 17:55
  #116 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Under the radar, over the rainbow
Posts: 701
Originally Posted by Twitter View Post
The quotes from and to TP Forkner put him and Boeing in quite a pickle, which while it has nothing to do with pickle forks as such, does amount to a fork-ing problem...
Yes, it keeps getting worse and Boeing/Forkner keep sinking deeper. Remembering that there was (is?) a DOJ criminal investigation and that there definitely are a number of very expensive civil suits pending, it looks like Boeing is going to remain deep in this stuff for a very long time.
OldnGrounded is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2020, 23:25
  #117 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Southern USA
Posts: 6
Originally Posted by Twitter View Post
The quotes from and to TP Forkner put him and Boeing in quite a pickle, which while it has nothing to do with pickle forks as such, does amount to a fork-ing problem...
Well done, put a fork in it...
Wooden_Blades is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2020, 23:37
  #118 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Tent
Posts: 476
Originally Posted by Ian W View Post
This is the critical issue - many of these comments are about the simulator behavior and not about the actual aircraft. It is really important that simulator errors and faults are not ascribed to the real aircraft. I haven't seen any thread that says that the original MCAS and failure of one AoA vane was something that could even be simulated. So 'technical pilots' talking about assessing simulator behavior cannot have been talking about the MCAS failure problems, and probably not even about MCAS operating correctly.
Yes, they made many comments about simulator issues but - "Would you allow your family to fly in a MAX aircraft" clearly is not talk about a simulator issue.

First big issue is that, the now 34 MAX simulators will actually need to simulate correctly. It seems that they have been substandard for some time, I expect that the simulators have received far less FAA oversight and scrutiny than the MAX ever did.

Should the MAX simulator be required to accurately simulate the full envelope with and without MCAS and accurately replicate the trim wheel forces, and should the simulator be compared to the aircraft independently of Boeing and the FAA to verify it simulates true aircraft performance?
Bend alot is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2020, 00:00
  #119 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 396
Originally Posted by Bend alot View Post
Yes, they made many comments about simulator issues but - "Would you allow your family to fly in a MAX aircraft" clearly is not talk about a simulator issue.

First big issue is that, the now 34 MAX simulators will actually need to simulate correctly. It seems that they have been substandard for some time, I expect that the simulators have received far less FAA oversight and scrutiny than the MAX ever did.

Should the MAX simulator be required to accurately simulate the full envelope with and without MCAS and accurately replicate the trim wheel forces, and should the simulator be compared to the aircraft independently of Boeing and the FAA to verify it simulates true aircraft performance?
I suspect the sims are built upon information provided by Boeing, perhaps the sims are not "substandard" but perhaps the data provided to program the sims is ?

Last edited by Longtimer; 14th Jan 2020 at 01:20.
Longtimer is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2020, 01:02
  #120 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Tana
Posts: 0
In the midst of the Boeing 737 disaster, I'm thinking about the coming certification of 777X. The new folding-wings system would require an enormous amount of trust between Boeing and the FAA which is now lost. It would also require a whole range of previously undeveloped tests for civilian airliners with folding wings, a task that requires trust between the public and the FAA, which is also lost. And FAA wants to gain back the public trust as well as its international credibility. All that considered, will 777X be certified at all, or will it just drown in overcautiousness?
UltraFan is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.